| 1 |
Reservation All Judgments till date |
Till September 2025 |
Reservation All Judgments List |
- |
- |
Download PDF link
|
| 2 |
Whether High Court was rightly set aside the Judgment of Trial Court where by divorce petition filed by the Appellant was allowed? |
Supreme Court allow these Appeals and set aside the judgment and order of High Court and the Trial Court’s decision granting dissolution of the marriage between the parties is hereby restored. |
Vinod Kumar Subbiah Vs. Saraswathi Palaniappan |
24/04/2015 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 3 |
Whether High Court was rightly allowed the appeal filed by the husband under Section 19 of Family Courts Act, 1986, and dissolved the marriage between the parties? |
Supreme Court affirming appeal and the decree of divorce granted by the High Court dissolving the marriage between the parties with further direction under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 that the respondent shall pay to the appellant Rs.40 lakhs as a lump sum amount of permanent alimony, within a period of three months from the date of this judgment. |
Vidhya Viswanathan Vs Kartik Balakrishnan |
22/09/2014 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 4 |
Whether High Court was correct in dismissing the appeals dismissal and grant of permanent alimony and directing the respondent -husband to pay a sum of maintenance amounting to Rs.12,500/- to the appellant-wife? |
Supreme Court dismissed the appeals and the decree for dissolution of marriage is affirmed only on the ground of mental cruelty. |
U. Sree Vs. U. Srinivas |
11/12/2012 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 5 |
Whether Bala Mallaiah, his heirs and purchasers had perfected their right, title and interest by virtue of adverse possession? Whether under the Muslim law, defendant no.1 being a co-sharer could have alienated the share of other co-sharers in the disputed property? Whether the purchaser has a right to claim equity for allotment of Item No.6 of Schedule ‘B’ property in final decree proceedings in suit for partition? |
Supreme Court allowed the appeals and Impugned judgment and decree passed by the High Court is set aside and the final decree of the Trial Court is restored. |
T. Ravi & Anr. Vs. B. Chinna Narasimha & Ors. etc. |
21/03/2017 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 6 |
2 Whether High Court was rightly directing the Appellant to vacate her matrimonial house and confirming the order of the Sessions Judge deleting the names of the other Respondents from the proceedings? |
Supreme Court held that judgments and orders both of the Sessions Judge, Amravati High Court are set aside and consequently, direct to the trial Court shall also proceed against the said Respondent Nos.2 and 3 on the complaint filed by the Appellant. |
Sou. Sandhya Manoj Wankhade Vs. Manoj Bhimrao Wankhade & Ors. |
31/01/2011 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 7 |
Whether High Court was rightly modified the order of Family Court and took note of the fact that the husband had retired on 01.04.2012 and consequently reduced the maintenance allowance to Rs.2000/-from 1.4.2012 till remarriage of the appellant? |
Supreme Court allowed the appeals, and the orders passed by the High Court are set aside and judgment of the Family Court is restored. |
Shamima Farooqui Vs Shahid Khan |
06/04/2015 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 8 |
Whether High Court was rightly disposed of the Criminal Revision came and the order of the Family Court has substantially been upheld whereby claim of the appellant was allowed to the extent of Rs. 2,000/- per month towards maintenance from the date of institution of the petition till the date of divorce? |
Supreme Court allowed the appeal and judgment of High Court is hereby set aside and quashed and held that even if a Muslim woman has been divorced, she would be entitled to claim maintenance from her husband under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. and matter is remanded to the Family Court at Gwalior for its disposal on merits after the expiry of period of iddat also, as long as she does not remarry. |
Shabana Bano VS Imran Khan |
04/12/2009 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 9 |
Whether High Court was rightly reversed the judgment of the Additional District Judge of dissolving marriage on the ground that the appellant has not been able to prove the allegation of mental cruelty? |
Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the High Court and the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge granting the decree of divorce is restored and held that the trial court based on the correct analysis of the concept of mental cruelty. |
Samar Ghosh Vs Jaya Ghosh |
26/03/2007 |
3 |
Download PDF link
|
| 10 |
Whether High Court was rightly held that Smt. Taruna Batra was entitled to continue to reside in the second floor of B-135, Ashok Vihar, Phase-I, Delhi as that is her matrimonial home? |
Supreme Court allowed the appeal and judgment of the High Court is set aside and the order of Senior Civil Judge dismissing the injunction application of Smt. Taruna Batra is upheld. |
S.R. Batra and Anr. Vs Smt. Taruna Batra |
15/12/2006 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 11 |
what would be the status of a person, one of whose parents belongs to the scheduled castes/ scheduled tribes and the other comes from the upper castes, or more precisely does not come from scheduled castes/scheduled tribes and what would be the entitlement of a person from such parents to the benefits of affirmative action sanctioned by the Constitution? |
Supreme Court allowed the appeal and the orders passed by the High Court and the Scrutiny Committee are accordingly, set aside and the case is remitted to the Scrutiny Committee to take a fresh decision on the basis of the evidences that might be led by the two sides. |
Rameshbhai Dabhai Naika Vs. State of Gujarat & Others |
18/01/2012 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 12 |
Whether High Court was rightly set aside the decree of divorce granted by the District Judge, A & N Islands? |
Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order passed by the High Court and held that marriage between the plaintiff and defendant has irretrievably broken down. |
Ramchander Vs. Ananta |
24/02/2015 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 13 |
Whether High Court rightly dismissed the Criminal Appeal of the appellant-Raj Singh and partly allowed the Criminal Revision qua Raj Singh filed by Bharat Singh and thereby converting the conviction of the appellant under Section 304 Part 1 IPC to Section 302 IPC and maintained sentence of life imprisonment imposed on him and dismissed the revision qua Rishi Pal and Rajpal? |
Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and held that High Court has, rightly recorded a finding that the appellants were the aggressors in the incident that led to the death of deceased-Girdhari Lal. |
Raj Singh Vs. State Of Haryana Etc Raj Kumar Vs. Mahabir & Ors. Bharat Singh Vs. Rishi Pal & Ors. |
23/04/2015 |
1 |
Download PDF link
|
| 14 |
Whether High Court was rightly allowed the appeal filed by the respondent herein and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955? |
Supreme Court allowed the appeal and the divorce petition filed by the appellant – husband stands accepted and a decree of divorce is hereby passed dissolving the marriage of the appellant with the respondent. |
Pankaj Mahajan Vs. Dimple @ Kajal |
30/09/2011 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 15 |
Whether High Court was rightly allowed the appeal and the decree passed by the Family Court seeking divorce and annulment of the marriage was dismissed? |
Court held that High Court was not justified in setting aside the order of the Trial Court and direct that the marriage between the parties should be dissolved according to the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. |
Naveen Kohli Vs. Neelu Kohli |
21/03/2006 |
3 |
Download PDF link
|
| 16 |
Whether High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore was rightly set aside decree for divorce passed by the trial Court? |
Supreme Court quash and set aside the judgment delivered by the High Court and the decree of divorce passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore is hereby restored. |
Narendra Vs. K. Meena |
06/10/2016 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 17 |
Whether High Court was correct to decline to interfere and confirm order of trial court where by claim preferred under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was not entertainable as wife had ceased to be an“aggrieved person” under Section 2(a) of the 2005 Act and further that the claim as put forth was barred by limitation? |
Appeal is allowed and the orders passed by the High Court and the courts below are set aside. The matter is remitted to the learned Magistrate to proceed with the application under Section 12 of the 2005 Act on merits. |
Krishna Bhatacharjee Vs. Sarathi Choudhury and Anr. |
20/11/2015 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 18 |
Whether High Court was rightly setting aside the decree of divorce granted in his favour of husband? 09/02/2015 |
Supreme Court held that if the parties are willing and if it appears to the criminal court that there exist elements of settlement, it should direct the parties to explore the possibility of settlement through mediation and according disposed of the appeal. |
K. Srinivas Rao Vs. D.A. Deepa |
22/02/2013 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 19 |
Whether order for removing the appellant from service for proved misconduct of contracting another marriage during existence of the first marriage without permission of the Government in violation of Rule 29(1) of the U.P. Government Servant Conduct Rules, 1956 was valid? |
Supreme Court held that the Conduct Rule in any manner is not violates Article 25 of the Constitution and do not find any merit in this appeal and accordingly appeal dismissed |
Khursheed Ahmad Khan Vs. State Of U.P. & Ors. |
09/02/2015 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 20 |
Whether High Court was rightly setting aside the decree of divorce granted in his favour of husband? |
Supreme Court held that if the parties are willing and if it appears to the criminal court that there exist elements of settlement, it should direct the parties to explore the possibility of settlement through mediation and according disposed of the appeal. |
K. Srinivas Rao Vs. D.A. Deepa |
22/02/2013 |
2 |
- |
| 21 |
Whether Section 2(q) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was constitutional validity? |
Supreme Court disposed off the appeal and set aside the judgment of the Bombay High Court and declare that the words “adult male” in Section 2(q) of the 2005 Act will stand deleted since these words do not square with Article 14 of the Constitution of India. |
Hiral p. Harsora and ors Vs. Kusum narottamdas harsora And ors |
06/10/2016 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 22 |
01/07/2013 Whether High Court was rightly held that as the appellant was not the legally wedded wife of the respondent and thus she was not entitled to maintenance granted by the learned courts below? |
Supreme Court held that the interference made by the High Court with the grant of maintenance in favour of the appellant was not at all justified and order dated 09/04/2010 passed by the High Court is set aside and the present appeals, are allowed. |
Deoki Panjhiyara Vs. Shashi Bhushan Narayan Azad & Anr. |
12/12/2012 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 23 |
Whether High Court was correct to dismissed both the appeals preferred by the appellant-husband, by accepting the finding of the Family Court, Hyderabad where by Divorce petition of husband was rejected and allowed application of restitution of conjugal right filed by wife? |
Supreme Court held that court cannot persuade ourselves to grant a decree of divorce, on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, for the simple reason that the breakdown is only from the side of the husband and thus no merit in these appeals, and the same are accordingly dismissed. |
Darshan Gupta Vs. Radhika Gupta |
01/07/2013 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 24 |
Whether judgment and order passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad by way of which the High Court reversed the judgment and order of the Sessions Judge, Vijianagaram where the appellant stood acquitted of the charges under Section 302 read with Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code? |
The appeal is allowed and the judgment and order of the High Court is set aside and the judgment and order of the Sessions Court is restored. |
Bhadragiri Venkata Ravi Vs. Public Prosecutor High Court of A.P., Hyderabad |
29/05/2013 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 25 |
Whether High Court was proper for upholding Trial Court judgment whereby, the award of maintenance to respondent No.1 at the rate of Rs.1000/- per month and to respondent No.2 (Daughter) at the rate of Rs.500/- per month in the application filed by them under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure? |
Supreme Court held that permissible categories under its benefaction, which are so entitled either because of the tenets supported by clear public policy or because of the need to sub serve the social and individual morality measured for maintenance and thus no interference required in High Court view and hence petition is dismissed. |
Badshah Vs. Sou.Urmila Badshah Godse & Anr. |
18/10/2013 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 26 |
whether the offshoot of the tribal woman married to non-tribal husband could claim status of Scheduled Tribe and on the basis of which the Scheduled Tribe certificate could be given? |
The condition precedent for granting tribe certificate being that one must suffer disabilities wherefrom one belongs. The offshoots of the wedlock of a tribal woman married to a non-tribal husband - Forward Class (Kayastha in the present case) cannot claim Scheduled Tribe status. |
Anjan Kumar Vs. Union of India & Ors |
Anjan Kumar Vs. Union of India & Ors |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 27 |
Whether a decree can be passed on a petition for mutual divorce under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955, when one of the petitioners withdraws consent to such decree prior to the passing of such decree? |
The judgment and order of the High Court is set aside and the petition for grant of mutual divorce under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is accepted. There will be a decree of divorce on the basis of the joint petition filed by the parties under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in respect of the marriage solemnized between the parties shall stand dissolved. |
Anil Kumar Jain Vs. Maya Jain |
01/09/2009 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 28 |
? |
There must be a close proximity between the positive act of instigation by the accused person and the commission of suicide by the victim. The close proximity should be such as to create a clear nexus between the act of instigation and the act of suicide. आरोपी व्यक्ति द्वारा उकसाने के सकारात्मक कृत्य और पीड़ित द्वारा आत्महत्या करने के बीच निकटता होनी चाहिए। निकटता ऐसी होनी चाहिए कि उकसाने के कृत्य और आत्महत्या के कृत्य के बीच स्पष्ट संबंध स्थापित हो। |
R Shashirekha v. State Of Karnataka & Ors. ( 2025 INSC 402) आर शशिरेखा बनाम कर्नाटक राज्य एवं अन्य। (2025 आईएनएससी 402) |
28th march |
2 JB |
- |
| 29 |
? |
Minor Discrepancies In Versions Of Eyewitnesses Not Relevant When There Is Overall Consistency Between Their Statements In Court & Earlier Statements Implicating Accused. प्रत्यक्षदर्शियों के बयानों में मामूली विसंगतियां अप्रासंगिक हैं, जबकि न्यायालय में उनके बयानों और अभियुक्तों को आरोपित करने वाले पहले के बयानों में समग्र रूप से एकरूपता है। |
The State of Uttar Pradesh v. Satendra, Etc. (2025 INSC 409) उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य बनाम सतेंद्र, आदि (2025 आईएनएससी 409) |
28th March |
2 JB |
- |
| 30 |
? |
The opinion of the experts, however weighty they may be, are not binding on the court and is only relevant for the court to consider it to come to a final decision on any fact in issue. However, since courts are not experts in the discipline of science, they ordinarily accept the scientific report and act upon it. But where the expert opinion suffers from certain shortcomings or ambiguities, lack of clarity, or inadequacy, it would be subject to judicial scrutiny and it would not be safe to rely wholly on the same under such circumstances. विशेषज्ञों की राय, चाहे वे कितनी भी महत्वपूर्ण क्यों न हों, न्यायालय पर बाध्यकारी नहीं होती और न्यायालय के लिए केवल किसी मुद्दे पर अंतिम निर्णय लेने के लिए उस पर विचार करना प्रासंगिक होता है। हालाँकि, चूँकि न्यायालय विज्ञान के क्षेत्र में विशेषज्ञ नहीं होते, इसलिए वे आमतौर पर वैज्ञानिक रिपोर्ट को स्वीकार करते हैं और उस पर कार्रवाई करते हैं। लेकिन जहाँ विशेषज्ञ की राय में कुछ कमियाँ या अस्पष्टताएँ, स्पष्टता की कमी या अपर्याप्तता हो, तो वह न्यायिक जाँच के अधीन होगी और ऐसी परिस्थितियों में उस पर पूरी तरह से भरोसा करना सुरक्षित नहीं होगा। |
Gastrade International v. Commissioner of Customs, Kandla (2025 INSC 411) गैस्ट्रेड इंटरनेशनल बनाम सीमा शुल्क आयुक्त, कांडला (2025 आईएनएससी 411) |
29th March |
2 JB |
- |
| 31 |
? |
Article 32 Petition Can't Be Filed Seeking Early Hearing Of Writ Petition Pending Before High Court. However, it is open to the petitioner to make a request before the High Court for early hearing. अनुच्छेद 32 के तहत उच्च न्यायालय में लंबित रिट याचिका की शीघ्र सुनवाई के लिए याचिका दायर नहीं की जा सकती। हालांकि, याचिकाकर्ता के पास उच्च न्यायालय में शीघ्र सुनवाई के लिए अनुरोध करने का विकल्प खुला है। |
Mohammad Aslam v. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad & Ors. [Writ Petition (Civil) No. 224/2025] मोहम्मद असलम बनाम इलाहाबाद उच्च न्यायालय एवं अन्य [रिट याचिका (सिविल) संख्या 224/2025] |
29th March |
2 Jb |
- |
| 32 |
? |
The Supreme Court has reiterated that before a complainant can seek a Magistrate's direction under Section 156(3) of the CrPC to register an FIR and investigate a cognizable offence, they must first exhaust the remedies under Sections 154(1) and 154(3) of the CrPC. सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने दोहराया है कि किसी परिवादी को सीआरपीसी की धारा 156(3) के तहत एफआईआर दर्ज करने और संज्ञेय अपराध की जांच करने के लिए मजिस्ट्रेट से निर्देश मांगने से पहले, उन्हें पहले सीआरपीसी की धारा 154(1) और 154(3) के तहत उपायों का उपयोग करना होगा। |
Ranjit Singh Bath & Anr. v. Union Territory Chandigarh & Anr 2025 (SC) 329 रंजीत सिंह बाथ एवं अन्य बनाम केंद्र शासित प्रदेश चंडीगढ़ एवं अन्य 2025 (एससी) 329 |
20th March |
2 Jb |
- |
| 33 |
? |
The Supreme Court ruled that land acquired by the government through its sovereign power of eminent domain for public purposes cannot be transferred back to the original owner by the beneficiary of the acquisition through private agreements. सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने निर्णय सुनाया कि लोक उद्देश्यों के लिए सरकार द्वारा अपनी संप्रभु शक्ति के माध्यम से अधिग्रहित भूमि को, अधिग्रहण के लाभार्थी द्वारा निजी करारों के माध्यम से मूल मालिक को वापस अंतरित नहीं किया जा सकता है। |
Delhi Agricultural Marketing Board, through its Chairman Versus Bhagwan Devi (Dead), through her LR 2025 (SC) 327 दिल्ली कृषि विपणन बोर्ड, अपने अध्यक्ष के माध्यम से बनाम भगवान देवी (मृत), अपने एलआर 2025 (एससी) 327 के माध्यम से |
20th March |
2 JB |
- |
| 34 |
? |
The Supreme Court recently criticised a judgment of the Rajasthan High Court for setting aside the conviction of a person for rape of a minor girl only on the ground that the child victim, during the cross-examination, remained silent and only shed tears. This silence cannot accrue to the benefit of the respondent. The silence here is that of a child. It cannot be equated with the silence of a fully realised adult prosecutrix, which again would have to be weighed in its own circumstances. हाल ही में सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने राजस्थान उच्च न्यायालय के उस निर्णय की आलोचना की जिसमें नाबालिग लड़की के बलात्कार के मामले में एक व्यक्ति की सजा को सिर्फ़ इस आधार पर रद्द कर दिया गया था कि जिरह के दौरान पीड़ित बच्ची चुप रही और सिर्फ़ आंसू बहाती रही। यह मौन प्रतिवादी के हित में नहीं हो सकती। यहाँ मौन एक बच्चे की है। इसकी तुलना पूरी तरह से जागरूक वयस्क अभियोक्ता के मौन से नहीं की जा सकती, जिसे फिर से अपनी परिस्थितियों के हिसाब से तौलना होगा। |
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VERSUS CHATRA 2025 (SC) 323 राजस्थान राज्य बनाम चतरा 2025 (एससी) 323 |
20th march |
2JB |
- |
| 35 |
How To Determine Law Governing Arbitration Agreement? मध्यस्थता करार को नियंत्रित करने वाले विधि का निर्धारण कैसे करें? |
In a significant judgment relating to International Commercial Arbitration, the Supreme Court ruled that in the absence of an express law governing the arbitration agreement, the applicable law should be determined based on the parties' intentions, with a strong presumption in favor of the law governing the main contract (lex contractus). The three-step enquiry test to determine the governing law of the arbitration agreement was: (i) express choice, (ii) implied choice, and (iii) closest and most real connection. अंतर्राष्ट्रीय वाणिज्यिक मध्यस्थता से संबंधित एक महत्वपूर्ण निर्णय में, सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने निर्णय सुनाया कि मध्यस्थता करार को नियंत्रित करने वाले किसी स्पष्ट विधि की अनुपस्थिति में, लागू विधि को पक्षकारों के आशयों के आधार पर निर्धारित किया जाना चाहिए, जिसमें मुख्य संविदा (लेक्स कॉन्ट्रैक्टस) को नियंत्रित करने वाले विधि के पक्ष में एक मजबूत अनुमान होना चाहिए। मध्यस्थता करार के शासक विधि को निर्धारित करने के लिए तीन-चरणीय जांच परीक्षण थे: (i) स्पष्ट विकल्प, (ii) निहित विकल्प, और (iii) निकटतम और सबसे वास्तविक संबंध। |
DISORTHO S.A.S. VERSUS MERIL LIFE SCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED 2025 (SC) 317 डिसॉर्थो एस.ए.एस. बनाम मेरिल लाइफ साइंसेज प्राइवेट लिमिटेड 2025 (एससी) 317 |
18th March |
3 Jb |
- |
| 36 |
Scope of preliminary inquiry प्रारंभिक जांच का दायरा |
The Supreme Court observed in a recent judgment that the landmark decision in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors(2014) "does not create an absolute rule that a preliminary inquiry must be conducted in every case before the registration of an FIR." "The scope of a preliminary inquiry, is limited to situations where the information received does not prima facie disclose a cognizable offence but requires verification. However, in cases where the information clearly discloses a cognizable offence, the police have no discretion to conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering an FIR. सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने हाल ही में दिए गए एक निर्णय में कहा कि ललिता कुमारी बनाम उत्तर प्रदेश सरकार और अन्य (2014) में ऐतिहासिक निर्णय “यह पूर्ण नियम नहीं बनाता है कि एफआईआर दर्ज करने से पहले हर मामले में प्रारंभिक जांच की जानी चाहिए।“ “प्रारंभिक जांच का दायरा उन स्थितियों तक सीमित है, जहां प्राप्त सूचना से प्रथम दृष्टया संज्ञेय अपराध का पता नहीं चलता है, लेकिन सत्यापन की आवश्यकता होती है। हालांकि, ऐसे मामलों में जहां सूचना से स्पष्ट रूप से संज्ञेय अपराध का पता चलता है, पुलिस के पास एफआईआर दर्ज करने से पहले प्रारंभिक जांच करने का कोई विवेकाधिकार नहीं है। |
PRADEEP NIRANKARNATH SHARMA v. STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS 2025 (SC) 315 प्रदीप निरंकारनाथ शर्मा बनाम गुजरात राज्य और ओआरएस 2025 (एससी) 315 |
18th March |
2JB |
- |
| 37 |
Whether offence of money laundering is a continuing offence or a one-time occurrence offence? क्या धन शोधन का अपराध एक सतत अपराध है या एक बार घटित होने वाला अपराध है? |
"It is well established that offences under the PMLA are of a continuing nature, and the act of money laundering does not conclude with a single instance but extends so long as the proceeds of crime are concealed, used, or projected as untainted property. Money laundering is not a static event but an ongoing activity, as long as illicit gains are possessed, projected as legitimate, or reintroduced into the economy. Thus, the argument that the offence is not continuing does not hold good in law or on facts. “यह अच्छी तरह से स्थापित है कि पीएमएलए के तहत अपराध सतत प्रकृति के होते हैं, और धन शोधन का कार्य एक ही घटना के साथ समाप्त नहीं होता है, बल्कि तब तक जारी रहता है जब तक अपराध की आय को छुपाया जाता है, इस्तेमाल किया जाता है, या बेदाग संपत्ति के रूप में पेश किया जाता है। धन शोधन एक स्थिर घटना नहीं है, बल्कि एक सतत गतिविधि है, जब तक कि अवैध लाभ प्राप्त किया जाता है, वैध के रूप में पेश किया जाता है, या अर्थव्यवस्था में फिर से पेश किया जाता है। इस प्रकार, यह तर्क कि अपराध सतत नहीं है, विधि या तथ्यों के आधार पर सही नहीं है। |
PRADEEP NIRANKARNATH SHARMA VERSUS DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT & ANR 2025 (SC) 311 प्रदीप निरंकारनाथ शर्मा बनाम प्रवर्तन निदेशालय एवं एएनआर 2025 (एससी) 311 |
17th March |
2 JB |
- |
| 38 |
? |
The Court reiterated that a presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (“PC Act”) would not arise against the accused unless the factum of demand and acceptance of bribe is established by the prosecution. न्यायालय ने दोहराया कि भ्रष्टाचार निवारण अधिनियम, 1988 (“पीसी अधिनियम”) की धारा 20 के तहत अभियुक्त के खिलाफ कोई उपधारणा तब तक नहीं की जा सकती जब तक कि अभियोजन पक्ष द्वारा रिश्वत की मांग और स्वीकृति का तथ्य स्थापित नहीं कर दिया जाता। |
MADAN LAL VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN 2025 (SC) 310 मदन लाल बनाम राजस्थान राज्य 2025 (एससी) 310 |
13th March |
2 JB |
- |
| 39 |
Does the agreement to lease create leasehold rights unless the lease deed gets executed and registered? क्या पट्टा करार पट्टा-अधिकार का सृजन करता है जब तक कि पट्टा विलेख निष्पादित और पंजीकृत न हो जाए? |
While interpreting the clauses in an agreement to lease entered into between the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and a party, the Supreme Court noted that the agreement to lease did not create leasehold rights unless the lease deed was executed and registered. दिल्ली विकास प्राधिकरण (डीडीए) और एक पक्ष के बीच हुए पट्टा करार के प्रावधानों की व्याख्या करते हुए सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने कहा कि पट्टा करार तब तक पट्टा-अधिकार का सृजन नहीं करता जब तक कि पट्टा विलेख निष्पादित और पंजीकृत न हो जाए। |
Delhi Development Authority Versus S.G.G. Towers (P) Ltd. & Ors 2025 (SC) 306 दिल्ली विकास प्राधिकरण बनाम एस.जी.जी. टावर्स (प्रा.) लिमिटेड एवं अन्य 2025 (एस.सी.) 306 |
11th march |
2 JB |
- |
| 40 |
Motor vehicle act मोटर वाहन अधिनियम |
The Supreme Court recently ruled that the term 'legal representative' under the Motor Vehicle Act should not be given a narrow interpretation to exclude those persons as claimants who were dependent on the deceased's income A "legal representative" is one, who suffers on account of death of a person due to a motor vehicle accident and need not necessarily be a wife, husband, parent or child, the Court held, referring to precedents. सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने हाल ही में निर्णय सुनाया कि मोटर वाहन अधिनियम के तहत ‘विधिक प्रतिनिधि’ शब्द की संकीर्ण व्याख्या नहीं की जानी चाहिए, जिससे उन व्यक्तियों को दावेदार के रूप में शामिल न किया जा सके, जो मृतक की आय पर निर्भर थे। न्यायालय ने उदाहरणों का हवाला देते हुए कहा कि “विधिक प्रतिनिधि” वह व्यक्ति है, जो मोटर वाहन दुर्घटना के कारण किसी व्यक्ति की मृत्यु के कारण पीड़ित होता है और जरूरी नहीं कि वह पत्नी, पति, माता-पिता या बच्चा ही हो। |
SADHANA TOMAR & ORS. VERSUS ASHOK KUSHWAHA & ORS 2025 (SC) 309 साधना तोमर एवं अन्य बनाम अशोक कुशवाहा एवं अन्य 2025 (एससी) 309 |
12 th march |
2JB |
- |
| 41 |
? |
The Supreme Court upheld the 2016 decision of the then BJP government of Assam to cancel a select list for the recruitment process of 104 Constables in the Assam Forest Protection Force (AFPF) notified in 2014 by the then Indian National Congress government. Sc stated when Selection Is Based Entirely On Interview Marks, It's Reasonable To Presume Existence Of Arbitrariness & Favouritism सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने असम की तत्कालीन भाजपा सरकार के 2016 के निर्णय को बरकरार रखा है, जिसमें तत्कालीन भारतीय राष्ट्रीय कांग्रेस सरकार द्वारा 2014 में अधिसूचित असम वन सुरक्षा बल (एएफपीएफ) में 104 कांस्टेबलों की भर्ती प्रक्रिया के लिए चयन सूची को रद्द कर दिया गया था। सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने कहा कि जब चयन पूरी तरह से साक्षात्कार के अंकों पर आधारित होता है, तो मनमानी और पक्षपात के अस्तित्व को मानना उचित है। |
State of Assam & Ors. v. Arabinda Rabha & Ors. 2025 (SC) 307 असम राज्य और अन्य बनाम अरबिंदा राभा और अन्य 2025 (एससी) 307 |
11th march |
2JB |
- |
| 42 |
Can subsequent cancellation of the PoA annul certain past sale transactions? क्या पी.ओ.ए. के पश्चातवर्ती रद्दकरण करने से कुछ पूर्व विक्रय संव्यवहार रद्द हो सकते हैं? |
The Supreme Court has observed that sale transactions carried out on the basis of a valid Power of Attorney (PoA) cannot be sought to be set aside later on the ground that the PoA was cancelled subsequently. सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने कहा है कि वैध पावर ऑफ अटॉर्नी (पीओए) के आधार पर किए गए विक्रय संव्यवहार को बाद में इस आधार पर रद्द करने की मांग नहीं की जा सकती कि पीओए को बाद में रद्द कर दिया गया था। |
V Ravikumar v S Kumar 2025 (SC) 301 वी रविकुमार बनाम एस कुमार 2025 (एससी) 301 |
10 th March |
2 Jb |
- |
| 43 |
POCSO and IPC पोक्सो और आईपीसी |
The Supreme Court clarified that when a person is convicted for an offence under both the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (“POCSO Act”) and the rape provisions of the IPC, Section 42 of the POCSO Act mandates the imposition of the higher degree of punishment prescribed either under the POCSO Act or Indian Penal Code (“IPC”). सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने स्पष्ट किया कि जब किसी व्यक्ति को लैंगिक अपराधों से बच्चों का संरक्षण अधिनियम, 2012 (“पोक्सो अधिनियम”) और आईपीसी के बलात्कार प्रावधानों दोनों के तहत अपराध के लिए दोषसिद्ध किया जाता है, तो पोक्सो अधिनियम की धारा 42 पोक्सो अधिनियम या भारतीय दंड संहिता (“आईपीसी”) के तहत निर्धारित उच्च दंड लागू करने का आदेश देती है। |
GYANENDRA SINGH @ RAJA SINGH VERSUS STATE OF U.P. 2025 (SC) 299 ज्ञानेन्द्र सिंह @ राजा सिंह बनाम उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य 2025 (एससी) 299 |
10th March |
2 Jb |
- |
| 44 |
Anticipatory bail अग्रिम जमानत |
The Court held that in serious offenses like corruption, courts must exercise caution when granting anticipatory bail to uphold public confidence in the justice system. It emphasized that anticipatory bail should only be granted in exceptional cases where there is a prima facie indication of false implication or frivolous allegations. न्यायालय ने कहा कि भ्रष्टाचार जैसे गंभीर अपराधों में, न्याय प्रणाली में जनता का विश्वास बनाए रखने के लिए न्यायालयों को अग्रिम जमानत देते समय सावधानी बरतनी चाहिए। न्यायालय ने इस बात पर जोर दिया कि अग्रिम जमानत केवल असाधारण मामलों में ही दी जानी चाहिए, जहां प्रथम दृष्टया मिथ्या आरोप या तुच्छ आरोपों का संकेत मिलता है। |
DEVINDER KUMAR BANSAL VERSUS THE STATE OF PUNJAB देविंदर कुमार बंसल बनाम पंजाब राज्य |
6th march |
2JB |
- |
| 45 |
discussed the impact of dismissing a suit seeking an injunction on previously disobeyed injunction orders पूर्व में अवहेलना किए गए व्यादेश आदेशों पर व्यादेश मांगने वाले वाद को खारिज करने के प्रभाव पर चर्चा की गई |
The Supreme Court observed that the subsequent setting aside of an injunction order would not preclude the courts from holding the party guilty of disobedience of the committed during the pendency of the order. सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने कहा कि व्यादेश आदेश को बाद में रद्द करने से न्यायालय को आदेश के लंबित रहने के दौरान की गई अवज्ञा के लिए पक्षकार को दोषी ठहराने से नहीं रोका जा सकेगा। |
SMT LAVANYA C & ANR VERSUS VITTAL GURUDAS PAI SINCE DESEASED BY LRS. & ORS. श्रीमती लावण्या सी और एएनआर बनाम विट्ठल गुरुदास पई मृत्यु के बाद से विधिक प्रतिनिधियों और ओआरएस द्वारा। |
6th March |
2 JB |
- |
| 46 |
Order XX rule 12 A आदेश XX नियम 12क |
The Supreme Court recently advised Appellate Courts to specify the time limit for depositing the balance sale consideration, as required under Order XX Rule 12A of the CPC, in cases of specific performance involving the sale or lease of immovable property. सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने हाल ही में अपीलीय न्यायालयों को सलाह दी है कि वे स्थावर संपत्ति के विक्रय या पट्टे से संबंधित विनिर्दिष्ट पालन के मामलों में, सीपीसी के आदेश XX नियम 12A के तहत अपेक्षित शेष विक्रय राशि जमा करने के लिए समय सीमा निर्दिष्ट करें। |
RAM LAL VERSUS JARNAIL SINGH (NOW DECEASED) THROUGH ITS LRS & ORS. राम लाल बनाम जरनैल सिंह (अब दिवंगत) अपने एलआरएस व अन्य के माध्यम से। |
4th march |
2 JB |
- |
| 47 |
2 JB whether the suicide note could form the sole basis for conviction? क्या आत्महत्या लेख दोषसिद्धि का एकमात्र आधार बन सकता है? |
The Court observed that for invoking the offence of abetment to suicide under Section 306 of IPC, the prosecution must prove instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid with a clear mens rea to abet suicide. Mere harassment or differences are not sufficient unless there is a proximate act leading to suicide. न्यायालय ने कहा कि आईपीसी की धारा 306 के तहत आत्महत्या के लिए दुष्प्रेरण के अपराध को लागू करने के लिए अभियोजन पक्ष को आत्महत्या के लिए दुष्प्रेरण के लिए स्पष्ट आशय के साथ दुष्प्रेरण, षडयंत्र या साशय सहायता साबित करनी होगी। केवल उत्पीड़न या मतभेद पर्याप्त नहीं हैं जब तक कि आत्महत्या के लिए प्रेरित करने वाला कोई आसन्न कार्य न हो। |
Patel Babubhai Manohardas & Ors. v. State of Gujarat पटेल बाबूभाई मनोहरदास एवं अन्य बनाम गुजरात राज्य |
5th march |
2 Jb |
- |
| 48 |
Whether expert evidence always require corroboration? क्या विशेषज्ञ साक्ष्य को हमेशा पुष्टि की आवश्यकता होती है? |
The Supreme Court observed that while expert evidence may not always require corroboration, courts must exercise caution when relying on expert testimony particularly the handwriting expert due to the imperfect nature of the science of identification of handwriting. सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने कहा कि यद्यपि विशेषज्ञ साक्ष्य के लिए हमेशा पुष्टिकरण की आवश्यकता नहीं होती, फिर भी न्यायालयों को विशेषज्ञ साक्ष्य, विशेषकर हस्तलेखन विशेषज्ञ के साक्ष्य पर भरोसा करते समय सावधानी बरतनी चाहिए, क्योंकि हस्तलेखन की पहचान के विज्ञान की प्रकृति अपूर्ण है। |
C. KAMALAKKANNAN VERSUS STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE C.B.C.I.D., CHENNAI सी. कमलाक्कन्नन बनाम तमिलनाडु राज्य पुलिस निरीक्षक सी.बी.सी.आई.डी., चेन्नई द्वारा प्रतिनिधित्व |
5th march |
2 JB |
- |
| 49 |
3JB Liability of non-executive and independent directors for the company's obligations under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) परक्राम्य लिखत अधिनियम, 1881 (एनआई अधिनियम) के तहत कंपनी के दायित्वों के लिए गैर-कार्यकारी और स्वतंत्र निदेशकों की देयता |
The Supreme Court reiterated that non-executive and independent directors of a company cannot be held vicariously liable for the company's obligations under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act), unless their direct involvement in the company's financial transactions is established. The Court held that merely holding the position of the non-executive and independent director of the company would not make them liable for the company's default unless their active involvement is proved सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने दोहराया कि किसी कंपनी के गैर-कार्यकारी और स्वतंत्र निदेशकों को परक्राम्य लिखत अधिनियम, 1881 (एनआई अधिनियम) के तहत कंपनी के दायित्वों के लिए उत्तरदायी नहीं ठहराया जा सकता, जब तक कि कंपनी के वित्तीय लेन-देन में उनकी प्रत्यक्ष भागीदारी स्थापित न हो जाए। न्यायालय ने कहा कि कंपनी के गैर-कार्यकारी और स्वतंत्र निदेशक का पद धारण करने मात्र से वे कंपनी के व्यतिक्रम के लिए उत्तरदायी नहीं होंगे, जब तक कि उनकी सक्रिय भागीदारी साबित न हो जाए। |
K. S. Mehta v. M/S Morgan Securities and Credits Pvt. Ltd. के.एस. मेहता बनाम मेसर्स मॉर्गन सिक्योरिटीज एंड क्रेडिट्स प्राइवेट लिमिटेड। |
5th march |
2 JB |
- |
| 50 |
Relevance of expert medical assessments to determine the capacity of individuals with disabilities to make independent decisions विकलांग व्यक्तियों की स्वतंत्र निर्णय लेने की क्षमता निर्धारित करने के लिए विशेषज्ञ चिकित्सा मूल्यांकन की प्रासंगिकता |
The Supreme Court ruled that in child custody matters, when there is uncertainty about the child's ability to make independent decisions, expert opinions confirming a disability should be prioritized over inferences drawn from direct interactions with the child. सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने निर्णय दिया कि बाल अभिरक्षा के मामलों में, जब बच्चे की स्वतंत्र निर्णय लेने की क्षमता के बारे में अनिश्चितता हो, तो विकलांगता की पुष्टि करने वाली विशेषज्ञ राय को बच्चे के साथ प्रत्यक्ष बातचीत से निकाले गए निष्कर्षों पर प्राथमिकता दी जानी चाहिए। |
Sharmila Velamur v. V. Sanjay and Ors. शर्मिला वेलमुर बनाम वी. संजय और अन्य। |
3rd March |
3JB |
- |
| 51 |
eligibility of participation of visually impaired and low vision candidates in the selection for posts under the judicial service. न्यायिक सेवा के तहत पदों के लिए चयन में दृष्टिबाधित और कम दृष्टि वाले उम्मीदवारों की भागीदारी की पात्रता। |
the Supreme Court on Monday held that no person can be denied consideration for recruitment in the judicial service solely on account of their physical disabilities. Accommodation must be provided to them while assessing their eligibility in terms of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने सोमवार को कहा कि किसी भी व्यक्ति को न्यायिक सेवा में भर्ती के लिए केवल उसकी शारीरिक अक्षमता के आधार पर विचार करने से वंचित नहीं किया जा सकता। दिव्यांग व्यक्तियों के अधिकार अधिनियम, 2016 के अनुसार उनकी पात्रता का आकलन करते समय उन्हें सुविधाएं प्रदान की जानी चाहिए। |
In Re Recruitment of Visually Impaired In Judicial Services v. The Registrar General The High Court of Madhya Pradesh, न्यायिक सेवाओं में दृष्टिबाधितों की भर्ती के संबंध में बनाम रजिस्ट्रार जनरल मध्य प्रदेश उच्च न्यायालय, |
3 March |
2 Jb |
- |
